DDoS Of Things -
Razer
rayzer at riseup.net
Wed Sep 28 18:14:31 PDT 2016
On 09/28/2016 10:31 AM, Sean Lynch takes the words right out of my mouth:
> The Internet is starting to feel a lot more like feudalism,
What I stated a while back about my reasons for never getting involved
in the computer industry as a way to earn my bucks... I don't get along
with fewdal punkz and hypercompetitive-hyperagressives reel well. So
what did they do? They FUCKED the whole 'Fucking thing'.
Rr
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Steve Kinney <admin at pilobilus.net
> <mailto:admin at pilobilus.net>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 09/27/2016 11:21 PM, grarpamp wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 3:46 AM, Mirimir <mirimir at riseup.net
> <mailto:mirimir at riseup.net>> wrote:
> >> Yes, it's for sure a hard problem. Any entity resourceful enough to
> >> withstand Tbps DDoS is likely a huge privacy risk :(
> >>
> >> On the other hand, Krebs has been totally asking for it, for years ;)
> >> He's been going after major cybercriminals, who perhaps have major
> >> connections with global TLAs. And he's often been a jerk about it.
> >> Hugely self-righteous, and humorless. So meh ;)
> >
> > He's already been swatted, manure mailed for lols, etc.
> > Though being AP'd by the cybers is probably unlikely.
>
> Meanwhile the Big DDoS has apparently been mitigated by Akamai or
> somebody.
>
>
> It was mitigated by Google's Project Shield. The Internet is starting to
> feel a lot more like feudalism, where you have to swear fealty to some
> lord or get overrun by barbarian hordes. Or, I guess, the way all
> governments want us to feel about the world. "Bad guys" like this are a
> government's best friend. Or a megacorp's.
>
>
> What bothers me is not this particular instance, but the proof of
> concept it represents, in a world where everything from refrigerators to
> night lights phones home. Things present a very diffuse and low-reward
> attack surface individually, but as reflectors they provide a potential
> solar-furnace-like effect in the hands of a sophisticated attacker.
>
>
> But the fact that they blew their wad early on a low-value target like
> Krebs means that the issue will get attention. Of course, if the cost to
> any given end user or their ISP is small enough, perhaps it won't be enough.
>
>
> "Physical access is game over" so it may turn out that whoever owns the
> most Things wins after all.
>
>
> Ownership of Things is not permanent, though. Maintaining a botnet is a
> neverending battle.
>
More information about the cypherpunks
mailing list